Prominent Bengaluru-based quick-commerce company Swiggy has received approval from the Indian markets regulator for its proposed $1.25 billion public issue according to reports. The food and grocery delivery platform had filed draft papers for the Initial Public Offering (IPO) with the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) through the confidential filing route in April this year, Economic Times reported citing an anonymous source. 

Swiggy will now need to file an updated draft red herring prospectus (UDRHP) with SEBI. A 21-day window will be provided for public feedback on the UDRHP before the IPO is launched.

The IPO is expected to raise Rs 3,750 crore ($450 million) in fresh capital, along with an offer-for-sale (OFS) component of up to Rs 6,664 crore ($800 million).

Bankers indicated the IPO size could increase before its launch. Major investors, including Prosus Swiggy’s largest shareholder with a 33 per cent stake and SoftBank, are likely to sell part of their holdings through the Offer For Sale (OFS). Other key shareholders include Accel, Elevation Capital, Meituan, Tencent, Norwest Venture Partners, DST Global, Coatue, Invesco, and GIC.

Swiggy’s annual report and financial health

Moneycontrol, mentioning Swiggy’s annual report that it had accessed, had reported earlier this month that its revenue grew 36 per cent from Rs 8,265 crore in financial year 2023 to Rs 11,247 crore in FY24.

During the same period, its losses were down 44 per cent from Rs 4,179 crore to Rs 2,350 crore. The loss reduction was largely attributed to stronger control on expenses during the year.

While Swiggy’s core business grew 36 per cent, it still trailed Zomato during the financial year. Gurugram-based Zomato, in comparison, had a revenue of Rs 12,114 crore (vs Swiggy’s Rs 11,247 crore) and clocked a profit of Rs 351 crore (vs Swiggy’s loss of Rs 2,350 crore) in FY24.

Still, while Swiggy closed the gap with its listed rival Zomato on the food delivery front, its Instamart grocery delivery business continued to lag with Blinkit. Swiggy Instamart clocked a revenue of Rs 1,100 crore in FY24. In the same year, Blinkit’s Rs 2,301 crore in the same year.

<o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>

Prominent Bengaluru-based quick-commerce company Swiggy has received approval from the Indian markets regulator for its proposed $1.25 billion public issue according to reports.

Prominent Bengaluru-based quick-commerce company Swiggy has received approval from the Indian markets regulator for its proposed $1.25 billion public issue according to reports. The food and grocery delivery platform had filed draft papers for the Initial Public Offering (IPO) with the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) through the confidential filing route in April this year, Economic Times reported citing an anonymous source. Swiggy will now need to file an updated draft red herring prospectus (UDRHP) with SEBI. A 21-day window will be provided for public feedback on the UDRHP before the IPO is launched. The IPO is expected to raise Rs 3,750 crore ($450 million) in fresh capital, along with an offer-for-sale (OFS) component of up to Rs 6,664 crore ($800 million). Bankers indicated the IPO size could increase before its launch. Major investors, including Prosus Swiggy’s largest shareholder with a 33 per cent stake and SoftBank, are likely to sell part of their holdings through the Offer For Sale (OFS). Other key shareholders include Accel, Elevation Capital, Meituan, Tencent, Norwest Venture Partners, DST Global, Coatue, Invesco, and GIC. Swiggy’s annual report and financial health Moneycontrol, mentioning Swiggy’s annual report that it had accessed, had reported earlier this month that its revenue grew 36 per cent from Rs 8,265 crore in financial year 2023 to Rs 11,247 crore in FY24. During the same period, its losses were down 44 per cent from Rs 4,179 crore to Rs 2,350 crore. The loss reduction was largely attributed to stronger control on expenses during the year. While Swiggy’s core business grew 36 per cent, it still trailed Zomato during the financial year. Gurugram-based Zomato, in comparison, had a revenue of Rs 12,114 crore (vs Swiggy’s Rs 11,247 crore) and clocked a profit of Rs 351 crore (vs Swiggy’s loss of Rs 2,350 crore) in FY24. Still, while Swiggy closed the gap with its listed rival Zomato on the food delivery front, its Instamart grocery delivery business continued to lag with Blinkit. Swiggy Instamart clocked a revenue of Rs 1,100 crore in FY24. In the same year, Blinkit’s Rs 2,301 crore in the same year.

Swiggy secures SEBI approval for $1.25 Billion IPO, paving the way for major expansion

There is an old story about Mullah Nasruddin, the main character in the Muslim world's folktales full of humour and wisdom, that comes to mind as we hear about Zomato and Swiggy being <a href="https://www.cnbctv18.com/business/companies/zomato-swiggy-receives-gst-demand-notice-dggi-exclusive-18386591.htm">chased</a>&nbsp;by the&nbsp;taxman.&nbsp;

The two food delivery companies are said to owe the government unpaid goods and services tax (GST) that between them is estimated by authorities at Rs 750 crore. That's not too far from $100 million.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.msn.com/en-in/money/news/zomato-swiggy-hit-with-gst-demand-notice-face-tax-troubles-report/ar-AA1kokhu?ocid=finance-verthp-feeds">Zomato, Swiggy hit with GST demand notice, face tax troubles</a>

The Nasruddin tale, to cut the long story short, is about his wife making up an explanation to account for a good portion of three kilos of meat that get consumed by her visiting neighbours, leaving the Mullah just bits covered with rice.

To escape his admonition, she tells him the cat ate the meat. Nasruddin weighs the cat which also measures three kilos. “If I am weighing the cat, then where is the meat?” asks Nasruddin. “And if I am weighing the meat, then where is the cat?”

Moral of the story for Smart Alec companies: Make up your mind on which part of the business value chain you are and don't try to be too clever by half in dealing with the taxman. Time and again, it has been observed that tax authorities are known to plug loopholes even when they are legal. When it is an open-and-shut case, it gets trickier for companies.

Also watch |&nbsp;Gravitas: Swiggy and Zomato facing tax troubles

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-swiggy-and-zomato-facing-tax-troubles-662092/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

If Zomato and Swiggy are indeed delivery companies that charge delivery fees, they have to be seen as service companies that are bound to pay service tax on the charges. But the problem is that food is a complex business. Raw materials do not cost as much in making a cooked item as other incidental costs involved in packaging, managing restaurant premises and maintaining a labour force.

Being venture capital-funded companies usually means that the likes of Zomato and Swiggy cannot think of themselves as just glorified courier companies. So they get into partnerships and promotional work in complex business models that take their work into a fuzzy zone.

Trying to convert some of that fuzziness into profit-sharing opportunities while also being a delivery company puts them in the position of Mullah Nasruddin's wife Fatima. You cannot eat the meat and say the cat ate it without knowing how the balance works. As it turns out, tax authorities may be slow to understand it all, but when they come down on an industry, they do so pretty hard.

As a perceptive research paper <a href="https://eauditoroffice.com/blog/business-model-zomato-vs-swiggy">said</a>: "Swiggy’s revenue is based on three major streams- Advertising, Commission, and delivery fees whereas the three key pillars that drive Zomato’s revenue are Food Delivery, Dining Out, and Hyperpure (formerly sustainability)."

To some extent, food delivery companies that run websites that have content and logistical muscle can add the apples of commission revenues with the oranges of service fees. However, in a cut-throat business where competition is intense but profit margins are high, there is a roller-coaster approach to promotions, technology, and partnerships. Zomato's early honeymoon with big restaurants as a dine-in demand provider ran into hiccups when high-end restaurants found the platform not as palatable as their gourmet food.

Perhaps it is time for venture capitalists and entrepreneurs to realise that complicated business models can boomerang while simple business models may not be alluring to investors. You have to strike a balance somewhere.

How about realistic valuations? And how about realising that a software platform with a bunch of delivery staff is what you really are.&nbsp;Keeping it simple is not a bad idea, though that might take some sheen of the high-tech image.

(Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

There is an old story about Mullah Nasruddin, the main character in the Muslim world's folktales full of humour and wisdom, that comes to mind as we hear about Zomato and Swiggy being chased by the taxman.

There is an old story about Mullah Nasruddin, the main character in the Muslim world's folktales full of humour and wisdom, that comes to mind as we hear about Zomato and Swiggy being chased by the taxman. The two food delivery companies are said to owe the government unpaid goods and services tax (GST) that between them is estimated by authorities at Rs 750 crore. That's not too far from $100 million. Also read | Zomato, Swiggy hit with GST demand notice, face tax troubles The Nasruddin tale, to cut the long story short, is about his wife making up an explanation to account for a good portion of three kilos of meat that get consumed by her visiting neighbours, leaving the Mullah just bits covered with rice. To escape his admonition, she tells him the cat ate the meat. Nasruddin weighs the cat which also measures three kilos. “If I am weighing the cat, then where is the meat?” asks Nasruddin. “And if I am weighing the meat, then where is the cat?” Moral of the story for Smart Alec companies: Make up your mind on which part of the business value chain you are and don't try to be too clever by half in dealing with the taxman. Time and again, it has been observed that tax authorities are known to plug loopholes even when they are legal. When it is an open-and-shut case, it gets trickier for companies. Also watch | Gravitas: Swiggy and Zomato facing tax troubles × If Zomato and Swiggy are indeed delivery companies that charge delivery fees, they have to be seen as service companies that are bound to pay service tax on the charges. But the problem is that food is a complex business. Raw materials do not cost as much in making a cooked item as other incidental costs involved in packaging, managing restaurant premises and maintaining a labour force. Being venture capital-funded companies usually means that the likes of Zomato and Swiggy cannot think of themselves as just glorified courier companies. So they get into partnerships and promotional work in complex business models that take their work into a fuzzy zone. Trying to convert some of that fuzziness into profit-sharing opportunities while also being a delivery company puts them in the position of Mullah Nasruddin's wife Fatima. You cannot eat the meat and say the cat ate it without knowing how the balance works. As it turns out, tax authorities may be slow to understand it all, but when they come down on an industry, they do so pretty hard. As a perceptive research paper said: "Swiggy’s revenue is based on three major streams- Advertising, Commission, and delivery fees whereas the three key pillars that drive Zomato’s revenue are Food Delivery, Dining Out, and Hyperpure (formerly sustainability)." To some extent, food delivery companies that run websites that have content and logistical muscle can add the apples of commission revenues with the oranges of service fees. However, in a cut-throat business where competition is intense but profit margins are high, there is a roller-coaster approach to promotions, technology, and partnerships. Zomato's early honeymoon with big restaurants as a dine-in demand provider ran into hiccups when high-end restaurants found the platform not as palatable as their gourmet food. Perhaps it is time for venture capitalists and entrepreneurs to realise that complicated business models can boomerang while simple business models may not be alluring to investors. You have to strike a balance somewhere. How about realistic valuations? And how about realising that a software platform with a bunch of delivery staff is what you really are. Keeping it simple is not a bad idea, though that might take some sheen of the high-tech image. (Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

As taxman tightens GST noose, Swiggy and Zomato need to learn the power of simplicity

swiggy-zomato-gst-row

Swiggy Zomato Gst Row, News on Swiggy Zomato Gst Row, stories on Swiggy Zomato Gst Row, articles on Swiggy Zomato Gst Row, Swiggy Zomato Gst Row stories at Wion, Swiggy Zomato Gst Row news, Swiggy Zomato Gst Row latest news

swiggy zomato-gst-row

Swiggy secures SEBI approval for $1.25 Billion IPO, paving the way for major expansion

As taxman tightens GST noose, Swiggy and Zomato need to learn the power of simplicity